Today's fun letter of the day sheds more light into the big brother mindset, as well as highlights the huge flaws in their conclusions. The author, a professor at the HHH School, Law School, and Applied Econ School at the U of M, lays out his argument for more sin taxes on soda pop and booze. Let's have at it:

While poor people may smoke, drink and engage in other unhealthy behavior more than the rich (including food choices leading to obesity), causing such fees to be regressive, these decisions are voluntary and consistent with a Republican free-to-choose ideology.

Yes, free-to-choose is consistent. But feel-good taxation is not consistent with conservative thinking.

In deference to brewing and wine drinking (one for the ballpark, the other for the opera), beer and wine might be exempted.

Fucking seriously? Your douchebag intelligentsia friends and co-workers who can afford to go to Taxpayer Field and the Opera, you'll spare them the tax on white wine spritzer. But tax Regular Joe who just wants to buy a case of High Life.

I can't fucking stand University high-society, chardonney sipping douchebags who want to exempt themselves from a liquor tax because of where and how the booze is consumed.

The guy is a douche as he probably doesn't like single malt so he's cool with taxing the shit out of it.

...written by Jonny Texas , July 14, 2011

OK professor toolenberg riddle me this?

Why is the delivery vehicle of alcohol important when your desire is to reduce consumption and it's effects?

The #2 most popular soda in the country is Diet Coke (no sugar). Taxing this at the same rate would not have your desired effects of reduction of type 2 diabetes or obesity. Taxing them at different rates will needlessly complicate pricing. Most juices have just as much sugar as soda and generally flavored milk has even more. Why not just tax fat kids?

JTwritten by Nobody , July 14, 2011

Gets it right! Tax fat people in general! That'll fix everything!

I'll be good, not so sure about Bart.

...written by tim-The Dyslexic Blogger , July 15, 2011

Both JT and Nobody Riddle me this how do you tell when it is bad choices that give some one a problem that you think you have the right to sit in judgment on that person.

I'm over weight and have type 2 diabetes with a severally damaged back from my service in the military. what came first the diabetes or the weight in my case it was the diabetes as my pancreases was damage by pancreantites and now produces no insulin of its own, my weight is both a part from the diabetes and the bad back not allowing me to do many exercises, add in several drugs that have side effects that keep water weight on and what do you get. some one that many people may think has made bad choices and ended up as a fat guy. So am I going to be taxed so I can fix things as you guys put it?

...written by TomC , July 15, 2011

I hate the government control factor with sin taxes. It is continually more justified as the government continues to get into other areas of our live, like health care. I hate that a deal was made this week. I'm becomming a "starve the beast" conservative. Sin tax the government into getting smaller.

...written by Jonny Texas , July 15, 2011

Dearest TtDB.

Please re-read the WHOLE post and not just the last sentence. Pay special attention to the first sentence as it sets the tone.

sar·casm [sahr-kaz-uhm]

1: a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain 2: a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual

The letter writer takes the position that to have less of something we should tax the causes. The fact is that the causes are many (some may even be hidden) as your story aptly demonstrates. Since what he really wants is less obese children, he should follow the logical conclusion of his argument and tax the fat ones.

...written by Nobody , July 15, 2011

I've learned to read JT with a note that he is one sarcastic bastard. Funny, on point, but sarcastic.

Obese is a moving goal post. When I was a kid, we had height-to-weight charts, then came the BMI, then they changed the BMI numbers as to what was obese. It is all nonsence.

I've got an adult child that is 6 foot and goes 220 lbs. Obese right? Nope he's a body builder an has about 2 oz. of body fat. Gimme a break.

...written by Jonny Texas , July 15, 2011

Nobody, you forgot to call me an asshole.

I will be sure to try harder in the future.

OK,written by Nobody , July 15, 2011

I will. Asshole...

...written by Jonny Texas , July 15, 2011

Now THAT is funny right there.

tax my fat?written by Barthélemy Barbancourt , July 15, 2011

OK, so I paid the alcohol taxes, the Minneapolis taxes and now a tax for paying taxes?

I admit that my fat is 100% lifestyle, but the state already got their cut.

C'mon Woody, why not just tax Hot Dogs, Apple Pie and Chevrolets. Throw an extra 25% tax on the American Flag, and you're in hog heaven, right?

...written by Nobody , July 17, 2011

I DON"T DRINK COSTCO BOURBON!!! I'm a makers Mark kind of guy.

...written by JW of Minnesota , July 17, 2011

Yes, we know. After the lashing you and Bart gave me on the other part of the Internets for buying the Costco stuff, I bought some Makers.

I usually drink scotch neat, or rye with ice, but found the Maker's bourbon is pretty strong if poured neat. Maybe I'm getting old, but it's pretty strong. Makers might be a higher proof than Johnnie Black.

I'm strangely okay with most of Woody's proposals above. Not sure how many trailers in Blaine have electricity, so a tax on meth might be more apt. You may find the Anti-Strib crowd more supportive of consumption taxes than income taxes.

...written by Woody , July 17, 2011

Chevrolets are taxed sanders and hot dogs and apple pie are not. I will continue to support 0 tax on hot dogs and apple pie and, as far as your comment on the American flag is concerned, well that's just absurd.

Everybody knowswritten by Nobody , July 17, 2011

That Blaine is Ojibwa for "Trailer Park".

and I might add....written by Woody , July 17, 2011

if you question my patriotism and love of this great country sanders as you did with your comment I should also say fuck you! I realize this is a violation of rule #1 at this site and for that I apologize to all those who have been offended with the exception of sanders of course but the defense of my love of country goes above and beyond the rules of this blog. Do what you must Bart/JW.

...written by Jonny Texas , July 17, 2011

I've known Woody for a while now and there is plenty to question:

1. His economics 2. His politics 3. His logic 4. His schizophrenic choice of scientific proof 5. His hygiene 6. His selective holding of accountability 7. His sanity 8. His civility

I dare you to find anyone on this board who hasn't displayed a disturbingly suspect level of all of the above at one time or another (except possibly Nobody, something tells me that there is some OCD about neatness there, but I can't prove anything)

However since the fleeing of Don, patriotism is not a lacking quality here (Woody or anyone else). Do not assume that a contrary voice is evil, stupid, or wrong. If everybody agreed with everything posted here it would be pointless to come.

...written by Woody , July 17, 2011

JT - How'd you know about my hygiene?? You've rattled off a painful list there but I do enjoy your company and recognition of my patriotism. Thanks!

That and I have gone through your garbage a few times. I have never heard of anyone using that much jock itch creme.............

...written by Nobody , July 17, 2011

JT, OCD, yup guilty as charged. It's made me good at what i do though. I suppose it wouldn't hurt an AFP either.

...written by Jonny Texas , July 17, 2011

AH-HA

Another bulls-eye for Nostra-Dumbass!

JTwritten by Nobody , July 18, 2011

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNNNNY! But I knew it. One doesn't wrench on things that can fall out of the sky without some attention to detail.

...written by Badda , July 18, 2011

Get off his jock.

Thank you, Woody...written by sanders , July 18, 2011

but you forgot the 'And how are the kids' part of the quote...

It was sort of a slap at your patriotism, since you defended a tax on foreign cars with a tax on American cars, and an 'auto-pledge/tax' with a tax on private enterprise entertainment... I guess I expected more in the way of discussion.

Ok, the flag bit may have been a bit over the top, but since the study came out that more people that attend 4th of July parades are (or grow up to be) Conservative, I am expecting more of the 'bash FNC' crowd to push something akin to the Fairness Doctrine around patriotic displays.

Write comment

You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.